is the better alternative. constructive criticism will continue to force important revisions but let's keep planning. tell us what you think at nbceditorials.com. >> this is "the chris matthews show." >> ask not what your country can do for you -- >> down this road. >> i can hear you. >> the time for change has come. chris: the wrong man. just when republicans accepted mitt romney, this week the spreek puts the focus on -- supreme puts the focus on the health care law, a law romney inspired in massachusetts. how can he be the number one attack dog and how can he promise to kill it? just as he wraps up a huge primary win, romney hear as top advisor say all his campaign promises are, he uses a watergate term, inoperative. is he stuck with the

etch-a-sketch label for good. "mad men," they're all back, betty, jon, the incomparable joan. what is it about their world we find so downright transing? is it something this country had and lost? is it about our youth? hi, i'm chris matthews. with us today new york magazine john heilemann, cnn's gloria borger, cnbc kelly evans and pulitzer times editor david leonhardt? what do they have in common? both can wipe the slate clean. and they could wipe out the health care law, let it stand or kill the heart of it. we'll get clues in the extraordinary three days of argument starting monday. the president has not been talking much about health care lately, but there was this the other night. >> we want to call it obamacare, that's ok because i do care. that's why we passed it. chris: mitt romney will be

invested by the republicans with the right and duty to make the president eat those very words. but that etch-a-sketch admission this week highlights his achilles heel. listen how rick santorum put it to "time" magazine mike halpern. >> there could be no person in this country we could dominate -- could nominate that would be any worse than taking on barack obama on the most important issue of the day than obamacare than governor romney. it's the equivalent of malpractice to nominate someone who gives away the most important issue in this race. chris: john, you know it is amazing this very week we had this whole thing breaking out just as romney has it locked up, it looks like, the nomination, you see the split the supreme court is having, the very problem he has, he inspired obamacare. how does he increase the credible attack dog on the very program he inspired? >> i hate to have such short answers on this program. the answer is he does not become the credible carrier of

that message. he cannot become the credible carrier of this message. there have been a number of things in this process that have been problematic for mitt romney. one of them has been the excavation of the full record on how much the people who are around romney inspired the program, to the extent to which the obama administration copied romney care in massachusetts. the recent discovery of this op-ed, though it's amazing it took this long to find it out in the today 2k5 -- in the "usa today" he wants his program to be a national model including the mandate. i don't see how you get around the actual history here and be a credible arguer on this point. i think rick santorum is exactly right, there's not a single republican that would be worse to carry the message. chris: rick santorum said it was malpractice. >> rick santorum has made this point consistently and made it throughout the presidential debates among republicans, which is that how can you have mitt romney be the standard-bearer against barack obama on health care reform

when it was modeled on his plan? you have handed the issue over to the democrats. but what you've also done is you've essentially neutralized the issue. it is no longer an issue. chris: especially the fact that -- let's go to david leonhardt, welcome, pulitzer bureau -- bureau chief of "the new york times." here's the question. the arguments for the first three days this week will be all about the individual mandate, the very essence, the heart of what romney gave to obama on a silver platter. how is this going to play out? >> i think part of the question is, does romney need to make a case against it if he's the nominee? i'm not sure that he does. there's not a huge groundswell of support for this law but there's not massive op position. people are -- opposition. people are divided, like the country is. chris: what about the base, don't they want to hear the yells? >> i do. i if romney gets the nomination, the base will go out and vote against obama. he's not ideal but not sure that will define him.

chris: there's been a court of public opinion ruling on this a long time. we have a new associated press poll that shows 51% of majority disapprove of the president's health care plan. in fairness to the president's plan, it hasn't been implemented but what they say and hear about it, they don't like. that's the court of public opinion. is that more important than the court? >> look, especially with regard to the presidential mandate, it's clearly unpopular. there's a part mitt romney comes out with authority here and that is to say we tried this and did it in massachusetts and did these specific pieces of this approach and it didn't work and here's why but he hasn't adopted that approach. and i thought the point was made well in "the wall street journal" the other day, he can take that argument and claim credibility himself and say we tried and it didn't work and here's what might work better. >> why can't he say let's repeal certain parts of it. he's saying we need to get rid of it instead of cherry pick what we don't like.

>> that's the point. he's his own worst enemy. there's a way to salvage this and we haven't seen it. >> the voters aren't picking through the law to figure out anything and romney turns his message obama went too far a i won't go for a far and leave it at that. it's not terrible. chris: what happens if the supreme court judges strike it down. this is like the chinese question, you'll be lucky you don't get what you dreamed for. if they strike it down, who does it help? the clintons didn't get through their health care bill in the 1990's but didn't have to carry the burden but yet their own people wanted it and they had their advantage by losing. >> it's a rare situation in politics if the court strikes the law down, romney and obama benefit. obama is not that popular for obama and to the extent it's popular with the base, the base will be mad at the court and rally around it. from romney's point of view for the reasons gloria and i were saying earlier, there's not political mileage in it for romney and have it off the table and allow romney to have

discussions on this issue isn't where he wants to be. >> it kills me we go back to square one and this could be struck down altogether and you think of the political capital wasted since the economic crisis and everything sense and the uncertainty from businesses and all that. chris: that's what people want, to go back to square one. >> it leaves us with a huge structural deficit problem that does nothing to address the source of this in the first place. chris: that's the big picture. all right. let me ask you, david, what the court is likely to do. they can't avoid the individual mandate as an issue, can they? >> the only way to avoid it is it they do a technicality and say we can't rule on it yet because it hasn't taken place and they could do that and kick it in the future. if they don't do that, then the main date is the heart of it, not the only issue but the heart of it. the people think the four liberal judges are clear yeses and they think that thomas and alito are clear no's. so then you've got roberts, you've got scalia and most importantly kennedy. if all three of them go to the more conservative side, they

all tend to be conservative, they're all republican appointees, then you get a 5-4 division. chris: have we ever had -- this is the kind of thing we argued in high school, we all did. has the supreme court gone far enough to say the interstate commerce clause allows the government to make you buy health insurance is what this law says. >> be clear, i'm not a constitutional legal seller here but your question -- >> you're playing one on television. >> from what i can tell, can you compel someone to buy -- you could say you could compel them if you want them to go to the doctor and have insurance to do that. if the law were structured that way, they might have luck. but to say you have to buy this, as far as what i can understand, it is the essence and the core of the problem here. >> politically by the way, anyone can spin this the way they want if they lose or win. if barack obama loses, yes, some people will say ok, republicans will say you passed a law that is unconstitutional, that's a bad thing but it does allow him to mobilize his base and if republicans lose, they

say you know what, we've got to elect more republicans. chris: a lot of young people in their 20's are young and healthy and don't like the government saying you've got to get a job and buy health insurance and feel that's intervention in their lives. how the supreme court ruling affects romney we put that to the matthews meter including 12 of our regulars including john and gloria. is romney better if the supreme court strikes down the health care law? it's tied 6-6. i think we've heard from you, what does it do to romney if it's struck down? >> if the law gets struck down, he can say, you see, barack obama tried to pass something bad for the country. chris: and unconstitutional. >> and thank goodness for the supreme court and that's why we have to move in a different direction and why we need to elect a republican. chris: this is a tough one. remember bush v. gore where the public saw the supreme court in many ways jumping into something it shouldn't have and operating in a partisan fashion. if they strike down this

democratic president's number one program, will that be viewed as a partisan ruling? >> i think it will. it actually would be good for romney because i buy the former bush writer speaker's line, at any given moment the americans are judging whether he's strong or weak and not left or right and would make him look weak and hurt obama and hurt the court and would be a 5-4 rules which the court never has thrown out a major piece of the safety net before and would be doing it, a 5-4 ruling in which the only votes for it were republican votes and so i think it would probably hurt the court as well. chris: kelly, is it your view or the same view that it's a partisan ruling if they rule against it? >> it's hard to see how the media rhetoric would be played out another way. obama's administration would play it that way and claim it was political and not a legally based decision. >> that's a problem for the court because you did have bush v. gore. this is health care reform which is a political issue. chris: and the thinking about this, they better not look partisan.

>> it's not comparable. a stolen election is not the same as striking this down. there is a constitutional, legitimate, very conservative play here on bush v. gore it was pure politics and purely corrupt. chris: there's an interstate commerce clause in how stretchable it is. before we break, "mad men" is back and that iconic music. don draper cascading through emages of american capitalism, those opening titles, images of the products the mad men push. the brilliant opening we heard, we've come up with an imagined title sequence for the story of barack obama's campaign for 2012. ♪

♪ chris: let's roll some of that again slowly so you can catch all the images of what obama is falling through. this year from the opponents to the issues, jobs, death, health, war, and that's our time. but when we come back, "mad men" is about the early 1960's before vietnam, before watergate certainly. we're fascinated by that time capsule. what will fascinate people about this time, right now? what's our time capsule? plus scoops and predictions right from the notebooks of these top reporters. be right back.

>> week nights, chris debates washington's biggest power players. chris: are you sticking to your guns on this, congressman. >> hardball with chris matthews week nights on msnbc.

>> why is it when a man takes you out you're dessert. >> that's terrible. look, i don't know you that well and you're the new girl and you're not much so you might as well enjoy it while it lasts. chris: welcome back. that's from the first season of "mad men" back for its fifth season back sunday night with a two-hour show. it's been a fascinating time capsule of the early 1960's, why so seductive in a time that's clearly retro. kelly, you might be the youngest here. why is it women, certainly all the producers we talk about every monday morning when it's on? >> part of it is "mad men" is a great show with a great narrative and a soap opera and actors and all that. what's interesting watching it, i watch characters like joan and go i want that character. where is the joan, the grownup, where is -- chris: a strong woman. >> it reminds me of peggy noonan where she was saying where are the grownups anymore?

and i watched that and i felt -- chris: you watch it and everything goes to hell on that show. >> that's what i think about. >> the thing about joan i love is she's the ultimate survivor, she's the spine of that office, and you look at the struggles the women had then and you think, you know, that's really worse than the way i had it. but we have it differently, and so you sort of relate to her that way. she's unbelievable. chris: the one thing i think people like about it is the period, precivil rights, a lot weren't right in the country and there was a sense of optimism, the new frontier, space program, peace corps, gung ho. >> life is clearly worse particularly if you're not a white guy. but there was a feeling of america ascendence, whether it's the moon program or how much more prosperous the country was becoming overtime. chris: and young. >> and i think on a personal basis a lot of people connect to that time and reminds them of someone in their lives. for me it's my grandparents and

for a lot of people might be grandparents or parents. chris: i could do so many things. you could smoke, you could drink. >> this is the key, it's a period where you have kind of like acceptable decadence that's allowed. drinking at lunch, being able to smoke. all the health-related p.c. nonsense is off the table and looked great doing it. they have the great clothes, doing all the stuff you're not allowed to do anymore. chris: a cocktail glass, a cigarette at lunchtime, cigarette on an airplane. >> yes. chris: you start here, john. what would be a time capsule, don't tell me those also things we communicate on. >> god, i hope not. i think we're already doing that, right? the series to me captured this era best had been the ones with, you think about homeland and anxiety and paranoia and the post-911 that's still with us. >> there's another series i think which is in treatment

about somebody on a couch with their shrink which is the sort of self-involvement. >> absolutely. >> that we have right now. chris: what do you think would be -- >> we're not going to have one because it's digital bits and bytes. you can't save a tweet. >> there is no context. >> so little sometimes i think in a physical world, so much of it happens and what we're doing takes place in this sort of cloud, it's going to be a bunch of people standing around on their device looking up, going uh-huh, uh-huh. chris: it's like they go to the movies to escape and yet at the movies they're doing that. david? >> something will disappear. facebook will disappear or twitter will disappear and ipads will disappear and there will be something that reminds us of an earlier time in life. chris: now back to our time. coops and predictions right from the notebook of these

chris: welcome back, john it. tell me something i don't know. >> this week we'll be watching the supreme court announcement on health care and keep your eye on paul clement who is arguing for overturning of the rule. he was one year behind obama at harvard law school. is sort of the contemporary of the president, arguing seven pro conservative cases before the court and is the dominant supreme court litigator of his generation and probably the next republican appointee to the supreme court. chris: who will he be talking to kennedy, mainly?

>> his entire brief is like a fan letter to kennedy. kendall throughout it. >> why are the rest there? april 24 is when the romney campaign goes in for the kill. and puts everything into beating rick santorum in his home state of pennsylvania. chris: can he do it? >> they already believe they have delegate vangs and played the delegate game very cleverly. on the ballot there because delegates are just listed and not listed who they're with. chris: i'll take you on. >> we'll see. >> the housing market, we saw bottom signs and things might be turning around and i say maybe not so fast. over the next weeks or months we'll have more data showing whether it was just a bout of euphoria and if there's downward pressure to come. not just housing but the economy may display this characteristic and saw it the last couple years and may see the same thing now when we're

talking about welcome to the recovery, it could be yet another turning point. chris: closer two than three? >> yes. >> a nice segue. we're a couple weeks away from getting the next jobs number and i'll say the jobs number will determine the narrative of this campaign. we're getting jobs numbers around 200 we'll find reasons to figure out why obama is doing a great job on all these issues. if jobs numbers are closer to 100 -- chris: the last report, david, the october report we'll get the weekend before we vote. >> yes. chris: will it be closer to nine or eight? >> i bet it will be closer to eight. if it's closer to nine it's a big problem for obama. chris: yes. second dip. thank you for the reporting here. when we come back, the big question of the week, will the florida case of the 17-year-old getting killed be a hotter issue this summer than the presidential election? be right back.

>> my main message is to the parents of trayvon martin.

you know, if i had a son he'd look like trayvon. and, you know, i think they are right to expect that all of us as americans are going to take this with the seriousness it deserves and that we're going to get to the bottom of exactly what happened. chris: welcome back. this week's big question, will the florida case of the shooting of the young trayvon martin be a hotter story this summer than even the presidential election. john? >> i think it's going to be a hot story because it obviously inflamed a lot of passions as it rightly should have and there's a lot of mystery still to be unfolded but i don't know the way the media is with its a.d.d. and limited attention span. the presidential race just kind of runs all the time and it's wallpaper. i don't know about hot but you'll get more coverage of the presidential election for sure and will be very incendiary as it's covered. chris: which is bigger, campaign or this?

>> it will build until justice has been done and the question, does it get to a broader discussion of that particular state. chris: will there be a trial this summer? >> i have no idea but will stay in people's minds and drive media coverage until there's a sense something has been done. chris: david? >> i agree with john and could become a big deal but even if it become as big deal the presidential campaign is likely to be bigger. chris: thanks for a great roundtable. john heilemann, david leonhardt, gloria borger, kelly evans. thanks for watching the show. see you back here next week. [captioning made possible by nbc universal]